ASIC Corporations (Renounceable Rights Issue Notifications) Instrument 2016/993

The instrument uses a small set of interlocking concepts. Each must be read together with the defined terms in s 4 and the conditional requirements in s 5.

• Renounceable rights issue. The instrument defines "renounceable rights issue" with three core elements for listed bodies and equivalent elements for listed registered schemes (s 4). For bodies these are: (i) the securities offered are in a particular class; (ii) the offer is made to every person (other than an "excluded person") who holds securities in that class, or their assignee, in proportion to their existing holding; (iii) under the terms the rights to acquire the securities can be sold or transferred to another person. The definition for schemes substitutes "interests" for "securities" but otherwise mirrors the three-part structure (s 4).

• Division 3 assets/rights. The instrument refers repeatedly to "Division 3 assets" and "Division 3 rights", and adopts the meaning in subregulation 1.0.02(1) of the Regulations (s 4). The instrument does not reproduce the text of that definition, so users must consult the Regulations to see what constitutes Division 3 assets/rights.

• Rights renunciation form. This term is defined to include Forms 5, 6, 7 or 8 in Schedule 2A to the Regulations or a form substantially similar to those Forms, or a notification form informing holders of Division 3 assets of their individual entitlement (s 4). The definition therefore permits either the standard prescribed forms in Schedule 2A or a substantially similar form or a tailored notification that identifies the individual entitlement.

• Excluded person. The instrument defines "excluded person" in a functional way: a person who resides in a jurisdiction where, in the reasonable opinion of the body or responsible entity, it is not lawful or practicable to make the offer as at the time of the offer (s 4). The test is an objective "reasonable opinion" of the issuer or responsible entity; the instrument does not prescribe how that opinion is formed or documented.

• Scope of the exemptions. The exemptions are phrased as a disapplication “to the extent” that particular subsections or sections of the Corporations Act require a rights renunciation form to be included in, or accompanied by, a disclosure document or PDS, or for a responsible entity to give a PDS to a transferee (s 5(1), s 5(2)). The effect is partial: other obligations in those sections may still apply where they do not concern the inclusion or provision of rights renunciation forms or PDSs in the particular circumstances described.

• Conditions for the exemption. The exemption is subject to positive steps by the listed body or responsible entity before offers are made: make the disclosure document or PDS available for inspection at the registered office or on the website during the offer period; provide the document free of charge if requested by a person other than an excluded person; and announce to every prescribed financial market on which the entity is listed that those arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(a)-(b)).

• Interaction with other instruments. The instrument relies on and cross-references the Corporations Act and the Corporations Regulations 2001 for both the authority to make exemptions (ss 741(1), 1020F(1)) and for definitions and prescribed forms (s 4). It therefore operates as a narrowly tailored exemption within the existing regulatory architecture.

Those are the primary legal building blocks. Practically, the instrument converts an automatic-document-delivery obligation with respect to renunciation forms into an availability-and-announcement regime, while keeping the exemption limited to listed bodies and listed registered schemes and to rights that meet the renounceable rights issue definition (s 5).

The instrument distributes costs, decisions and altered compliance burdens across a narrow set of participants. The principal categories are:

• Listed bodies. Section 5(1) applies when there is a renounceable rights issue of securities of a listed body and a person is involved in issuing a rights renunciation form while settling a sale of Division 3 rights. That person receives the partial exemption from subsections 721(1), 723(1) and 727(2) of the Corporations Act to the extent those subsections require a rights renunciation form to be included in, or accompanied by, a disclosure document (s 5(1)). The instrument does not identify who that person might be in corporate practice; the text uses the functional phrase "a person involved in the issuing of a rights renunciation form" (s 5(1)).

• Responsible entities of listed registered schemes. Section 5(2) operates on responsible entities who make offers in connection with a renounceable rights issue of interests in a listed registered scheme. The exemption relieves them from sections 1012B and 1016A of the Act, to the extent those provisions require a rights renunciation form to be included in or accompanied by a PDS, or require giving a PDS to a transferee (s 5(2)(a)-(b)).

• Holders and transferees of Division 3 rights. The instrument affects the information flow to holders and transferees. Where the exemption applies, addressees of renounceable offers or transferees of transferred Division 3 rights will not automatically receive a disclosure document or PDS with the renunciation form. Instead, the document must be available for inspection at the registered office or on the entity’s website, and must be given free of charge upon request to any person who is not an excluded person (s 5(3)(a)(i)-(ii)).

• Persons who issue or handle rights renunciation forms. Intermediaries, registries, brokers or settlement agents who issue renunciation forms as part of transferring Division 3 rights will be operating under the exemption (s 5(1)). The instrument alters their operational practice by allowing omission of the physical or accompanying disclosure document, but it imposes the conditional duties on the issuer/responsible entity to ensure availability and market announcement (s 5(3)).

• Jurisdictional outliers: excluded persons. The instrument explicitly contemplates and excludes persons in jurisdictions where, in the reasonable opinion of the body or responsible entity, it is not lawful or practicable to make the offer. Those excluded persons remain outside the renounceable rights offer and therefore are not entitled to the same availability/right-to-request treatment under the instrument (s 4).

Who pays and who decides. The cost of compliance shifts in modest ways. The listed body or responsible entity must decide on, and implement, the arrangements required by s 5(3): maintain a copy of the disclosure document or PDS at the registered office or on a website, put process controls in place to supply free copies on request, and announce to each prescribed financial market that those arrangements exist or will exist (s 5(3)(a)-(b)). Those actions impose administrative and disclosure costs on issuers and responsible entities, but remove the need to include or accompany every renunciation form with a disclosure document (s 5(1)-(2)). For transferees, the immediate effect is a change in the default access to disclosure materials: information remains available but may require an affirmative request.

Geographical and structural scope. The instrument is explicitly limited to listed bodies and listed registered schemes and to renounceable rights issues as defined (s 4, s 5(1)-(2)). It therefore does not address unlisted entities or non-renounceable offers within the text of the instrument.

The instrument rearranges certain duties and preserves specific rights by way of conditional exemptions. It is important to separate the duties it disapplies from the duties it creates or preserves.

Duties disapplied (partially)

• For listed bodies: the instrument disapplies compliance with subsections 721(1), 723(1) and 727(2) of the Corporations Act "to the extent" those provisions require a rights renunciation form to be included in, or accompanied by, a disclosure document (s 5(1)). The text is narrowly targeted; it does not state that those sections are wholly disapplied, only that the particular requirement about inclusion or accompaniment of renunciation forms is not required in the specified circumstances.

• For responsible entities of listed registered schemes: the instrument disapplies compliance with sections 1012B and 1016A of the Act to the extent those sections require a rights renunciation form to be included in or accompanied by a PDS, or require giving a PDS to a transferee (s 5(2)(a)-(b)).

Duties imposed or preserved

• Availability of disclosure materials. Before offers are made in connection with a renounceable rights issue, the listed body or responsible entity must have arrangements in place to ensure that, during the offer period, the disclosure document or PDS is made available for inspection at the registered office or is published on the entity’s website (s 5(3)(a)(i)).

• Free supply on request. The listed body or responsible entity must ensure that, if requested by a person (other than an excluded person), the disclosure document or PDS is provided free of charge to that person (s 5(3)(a)(ii)). This preserves the right of persons to obtain the document, but converts the delivery model from automatic to on-request.

• Market announcement. The listed body or responsible entity must announce to each prescribed financial market on which it is listed that the availability and request arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(b)). This creates an obligation to notify markets about the practical arrangements underpinning the exemption.

Rights preserved for addressees

• Right to obtain disclosure. Any person who is not an excluded person retains the right to obtain the disclosure document or PDS free of charge on request during the offer period (s 5(3)(a)(ii)).

• Transferability of rights. The renounceable rights issue definition explicitly requires that the rights be transferable or sellable (s 4(a)(iii), s 4(b)(iii)). That characteristic is part of the legal structure enabling secondary trading and therefore underpins the operational context for the exemption.

Discretion retained by issuers

• Determination of excluded persons. The issuer or responsible entity has the discretion to form a "reasonable opinion" that persons in certain jurisdictions are excluded because it is not lawful or practicable to make the offer there (s 4). That judgment determines who is offered, and who is entitled to request a copy of the disclosure document or PDS under the instrument.

Conditional character of the exemption

• "To the extent" drafting. The instrument repeatedly uses the phrase "to the extent" when disapplying statutory obligations (s 5(1)-(2)). This limits the exemption to the specific requirement about inclusion or accompaniment of forms; it does not create a free-standing exemption from other obligations that the named Act provisions might impose.

Record-keeping and operational duties (implied). While the instrument does not expressly require record-keeping, the duties it imposes (registered office availability, website publication, provision on request, market announcement) carry implied operational and record-keeping work: maintain a website copy during the offer period; promptly fulfil free-copy-on-request obligations; and be able to demonstrate to markets that arrangements are in place (s 5(3)). The instrument itself does not prescribe how these are to be evidenced, but the duties create administrative responsibilities for issuers and responsible entities.

The instrument is an exemption instrument and does not, within its text, create penalty provisions or specify enforcement procedures. The following points are drawn from the instrument's content and structure.

• No penalties in the instrument itself. The instrument provides no express civil or criminal penalties for failing to satisfy the conditions it prescribes. It removes or limits specified disclosure duties in the Corporations Act where the instrument's conditions are met (s 5(1)-(3)), but it does not itself append sanctions for breach of the instrument.

• Exemption as a legal mechanism. The instrument is made under subsections 741(1) and 1020F(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (s 3). Those provisions provide the authority for ASIC to make legislative instruments that grant exemptions or modifications. The instrument therefore operates as an ASIC exemption that modifies the application of particular Act provisions, rather than as primary legislation imposing new offences.

• Enforcement implied through the Corporations Act. Because the instrument adjusts how certain sections of the Corporations Act apply, any enforcement action for a failure to comply with the Corporations Act will still turn on the Act's provisions, insofar as they are not disapplied by the instrument. The instrument disapplies specified requirements "to the extent" they require inclusion or accompaniment of renunciation forms (s 5(1)-(2)), but it does not affect other statutory duties under the Corporations Act. The instrument itself does not identify which enforcement body will administer compliance; however, as an ASIC instrument made under ASIC powers, matters of compliance and regulatory supervision will operate within the existing enforcement architecture for the Act.

• Demonstrating compliance with the instrument’s conditions. If an issuer or responsible entity claims the benefit of the exemption, it must have had the arrangements in place before offers are made (s 5(3)). In any regulatory review or enforcement context, being able to demonstrate that those arrangements existed at the relevant time will be central. The instrument requires an announcement to each prescribed financial market that the arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(b)), which creates a public record. Absent the instrument prescribing evidentiary steps, the likely practical enforcement pathway is that ASIC or another regulator would examine whether the issuer met the conditions before the exemption was claimed.

• Discretion and "reasonable opinion" test. The instrument leaves certain decisions to the issuer or responsible entity, notably the formation of a "reasonable opinion" that an offer cannot lawfully or practicably be made to a person in a particular jurisdiction (s 4). If the reasonableness of that opinion were contested, the instrument does not set a procedure; any contest would proceed within the usual legal mechanisms available under the Corporations Act and administrative law.

In short, the instrument itself contains no penalty schedule. It functions as an ASIC exemption that changes the legal consequences of not including or accompanying renunciation forms with disclosure materials in tightly specified settings, subject to conditions. Enforcement questions will therefore be handled by reference to the Corporations Act and the usual regulatory tools, with the instrument's own conditions forming the basis for assessing whether an exemption was legitimately available.

This instrument is explicitly cross-referential and contingent on provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 and the Corporations Regulations 2001. Its operation and scope are therefore shaped by those instruments.

• Amendment versus exemption. The instrument does not amend the Corporations Act; it is an ASIC legislative instrument made under statutory authority (ss 741(1), 1020F(1)) that grants exemptions from specified obligations in the Act (s 3). It therefore modifies the practical application of certain Act provisions for the specified circumstances without altering the statutory wording of those Act sections.

• Cross-reference to specific Act sections. The instrument disapplies parts of the Act only "to the extent" they require inclusion or accompaniment of rights renunciation forms or provision of a PDS to transferees. It identifies the affected Act provisions by number: subsections 721(1), 723(1) and 727(2) for bodies (s 5(1)); sections 1012B and 1016A for responsible entities of registered schemes (s 5(2)). The instrument therefore sits beside those sections and narrows when they require physical or automatic inclusion/provision of renunciation forms.

• Dependence on the Regulations for definitions and forms. Several defined terms and form references in the instrument point to the Corporations Regulations 2001. The definitions of "Division 3 asset" and "Division 3 rights" are taken from subregulation 1.0.02(1) of the Regulations (s 4). The rights renunciation form may be Forms 5-8 in Schedule 2A to the Regulations or a substantially similar form (s 4). Consequently, the operational content of the instrument depends on the Regulations, and any change to those Regulations could affect which assets/rights are captured and what the prescribed forms look like.

• Interaction with market disclosure regimes. The instrument requires announcement to each "prescribed financial market" on which the entity is listed that the availability arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(b)). The instrument does not define "prescribed financial market"; that term is drawn from the broader regulatory framework. Entities will need to identify which markets count as prescribed for the purposes of their listing and tailor announcements accordingly. The instrument therefore requires co-ordination between corporate disclosure practice and market listing rules.

• Relationship to private contract law and settlement procedures. The instrument operates in the practical setting of secondary trading of renounceable rights and the settlement of sales of Division 3 rights. It alters disclosure mechanics relevant to those transfers , not the underlying contractual terms that govern the sale or assignment of rights. The instrument does not modify contractual or statutory transfer formalities for the rights themselves; it relates only to whether a renunciation form must be accompanied by a disclosure document or PDS in the specified circumstances (s 5(1)-(2)).

• Regulatory hierarchy and administrative law. The instrument is an administrative exemption made under statutory power. It must be read against the Corporations Act and Regulations, and would be subject to judicial review or administrative appeal if an affected party sought to challenge ASIC’s exercise of power. The instrument itself does not prescribe appeal rights; it sits within the statutory framework that governs ASIC instruments.

• Limits on geographical application. The instrument contemplates excluding persons in jurisdictions where, in the reasonable opinion of the issuer, it is not lawful or practicable to make the offer (s 4). This means the instrument interacts with foreign legal regimes insofar as issuers must form an opinion about permissibility or practicality of offering in other jurisdictions. The instrument does not remove the need to respect foreign law; rather, it builds that factual and legal assessment into the issuer’s decision-making.

In operational terms, the instrument reduces the overlap between rights-renunciation processes and some automatic disclosure obligations under the Act, while preserving the obligation to make disclosure available and to notify markets. Because it leans on the Regulations for definitions and forms, and on market definitions for announcement duties, entities must reconcile their practices across the Act, the Regulations and market listing rules.

The instrument itself contains only a narrow amendment record within its text.

• Date made and commencement. The instrument records that it was made by a delegate of ASIC on 10 October 2016 (s 3 and the heading). It commences on the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation (s 2). There are no other dates, revocations, or amendment notations within the instrument text provided.

• No subsequent amendments recorded in the text. The instrument as supplied contains no clauses that amend other instruments, no revocation provision, and no later amendment history appended to the text. The instrument does not include a schedule of amendments or a timetable for expiry.

• Reliance on external instruments. Although the instrument itself has no recorded amendment history in the provided text, its ongoing operation depends on other instruments (the Corporations Act and the Corporations Regulations). Changes to those instruments , including to the definitions referenced (for example, Division 3 assets or Schedule 2A Forms 5-8) or to the statutory powers under which ASIC acts (ss 741(1), 1020F(1)) , would affect the reach and application of this instrument even where the instrument text remains unchanged.

• No transitional or savings provisions included. The instrument does not include explicit transitional provisions or savings clauses in the text provided. It simply states its commencement timing and operative content (ss 2-5). Entities relying on the instrument should treat it as operative from the stated commencement date and be alert to any external legislative or regulatory changes.

Consequence for users. Because the instrument contains no textual record of amendments within the excerpt provided, a user assessing its current effect must check the Federal Register of Legislation and the Corporations Regulations for any changes to the referenced definitions, forms or powers, and for any subsequent ASIC instruments that modify or revoke it. The instrument’s own narrow scope means that its practical longevity will be determined by the surrounding statutory and regulatory environment.

The instrument text supplied does not contain any case citations, judicial commentary or references to litigation. It is an ASIC legislative instrument whose content is limited to a discrete exemption and associated conditions (ss 1-5). The following points therefore reflect what the instrument itself records and what it does not:

• No cases named. The instrument contains no judicial decisions, no references to precedent, and no mention of litigation challenging the instrument or its application. It contains only the delegation signature, date, and operative provisions (s 3).

• No internal dispute resolution mechanism specified. The instrument does not include a mechanism for resolving disputes about whether an exemption applies, whether the conditions were met, or whether a person was an excluded person; those questions would be addressed through the ordinary administrative or judicial processes under the Corporations Act and administrative law, but such processes are not described or modified in the instrument.

• Implications for potential litigation. Because the instrument disapplies certain disclosure duties only "to the extent" they require inclusion or accompaniment of renunciation forms, a litigation or regulatory review would likely focus on factual questions set out in the instrument: whether the offer met the renounceable rights issue definition (s 4), whether the entity had the requisite arrangements in place before offers were made (s 5(3)), whether a transferee was an excluded person (s 4), and whether the market announcement was made to each prescribed financial market on which the entity was listed (s 5(3)(b)). The instrument’s text provides the legal markers that would frame any contest, but it contains no litigation history itself.

• Practical consequence for practitioners. Advisers must not rely on any unstated litigation gloss in the instrument. Because there is no litigation history included in the text, practitioners should treat the instrument as a statutory exemption that could be subject to regulatory scrutiny or judicial review and plan evidence and contemporaneous records accordingly.

In sum, the instrument itself contains no litigation history. Any disputes about its application would be settled by applying the instrument’s text to the facts and, if contentious, by recourse to the broader enforcement and judicial framework that governs administration of the Corporations Act.

The instrument’s apparent simplicity hides a number of operational and legal subtleties that can trip up users. These are concrete points traceable to the instrument’s text.

• "To the extent" limitation. The exemptions are expressly limited “to the extent” that the listed Act provisions require a rights renunciation form to be included in or accompanied by disclosure material (s 5(1)-(2)). This is not a blanket exemption from the cited Act provisions. Practitioners must parse the scope of the underlying Act provisions to identify precisely which requirements are disapplied and which remain. Failure to map that boundary can lead to unintentional non-compliance.

• Reliance on external definitions and forms. The instrument defers to the Corporations Regulations for the definitions of Division 3 assets/rights and for Forms 5-8 in Schedule 2A (s 4). Users must check the Regulations to confirm whether a specific asset or right is a Division 3 asset and to see the content/format of the prescribed forms. A mismatch between the form used and the Schedule 2A prescriptions could jeopardise the exemption if the "substantially similar" threshold is not met.

• "Substantially similar" standard for forms. The definition of "rights renunciation form" accepts Forms 5-8 or a form that is "substantially similar" (s 4). That is a qualitative threshold. There is no detailed specification in the instrument of what counts as substantially similar. A form that deviates materially from the Schedule 2A forms might be found not to meet the definition, removing the benefit of the exemption.

• Excluded person determination. The instrument permits issuers to exclude persons who reside where "in the reasonable opinion of the body or responsible entity, it is not lawful or practicable to make the offer" (s 4). The test is framed by the issuers’ "reasonable opinion". That grants issuers discretion, but in any challenge the reasonableness of that opinion could be examined. Documenting the basis for the opinion will therefore be important but the instrument does not prescribe how to evidence it.

• Availability vs automatic delivery. The exemption replaces automatic inclusion or delivery of disclosure materials with availability for inspection and the requirement to provide free copies on request (s 5(3)(a)(i)-(ii)). That shifts the onus to holders/transferees to request a copy. For fast-moving secondary trades in rights, the delay between request and receipt may be operationally significant. Parties reliant on immediate access to disclosure should build operational processes to request and receive documents promptly.

• Announcement to each prescribed financial market. The instrument requires announcement "to each prescribed financial market on which the body or scheme is listed" that the arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(b)). The instrument does not define "prescribed financial market". Entities must determine which markets meet that description under the broader regulatory framework and ensure announcements are made to all of them. Missing one market could undermine compliance.

• Timing of the arrangements. The instrument requires the arrangements to be in place before offers are made (s 5(3)). That means preparatory work must be completed in advance of the renounceable rights issue launch. Rushed or ad hoc arrangements put in place after offers have already been made could be insufficient.

• Scope limited to listed entities and renounceable rights issues. The exemption only applies to listed bodies and listed registered schemes and only to offers that satisfy the renounceable rights issue definition (s 4, s 5(1)-(2)). Offers that are non-renounceable, or offers in unlisted entities, are outside the instrument’s scope.

• Interaction with other disclosure obligations. The instrument disapplies a narrow part of certain sections but does not remove other statutory duties that may apply to offers, such as continuous disclosure obligations or other sections of the Corporations Act. Reliance on the instrument without auditing other disclosure duties may leave gaps.

• No penalty clause in the instrument. Because there are no express penalties contained in the instrument, users must be aware that non-compliance will be treated under the Corporations Act and general administrative law, not under a bespoke penalty schedule in the instrument. The absence of a penalty clause does not immunise an issuer from regulatory action.

These practical pitfalls are traceable to the instrument’s specific wording and its cross-references to the Regulations and the Corporations Act. Practitioners should document decisions and evidence compliance steps, especially for excluded-person determinations, the content and timing of market announcements, and records that the disclosure document or PDS was available and supplied on request.

Below is a practical compliance checklist, tied directly to the instrument’s text (s 2-5) and definitions (s 4). The list is operational rather than exhaustive; it focuses on the concrete actions an issuer or responsible entity should take to rely on the exemption.

1. Confirm applicability to the transaction

• Verify the offer is a "renounceable rights issue" as defined in s 4: (i) the securities or interests being offered are in a particular class; (ii) the offer is made to every person (other than an excluded person) holding securities/interests in that class, or their assignee, in proportion to their holdings; (iii) the rights to acquire the securities/interests can be sold or transferred (s 4). If any of these elements is not satisfied, the instrument does not apply.

2. Confirm entity status

• Ensure the issuer is a listed body or that the entity is a listed registered scheme with a responsible entity, as the exemptions apply only to those categories (s 5(1)-(2)). If the entity is unlisted, this instrument is not available.

3. Check Division 3 classification and forms

• Consult subregulation 1.0.02(1) of the Corporations Regulations to confirm the asset or right is a Division 3 asset and that the transfer involves Division 3 rights, as the instrument refers to those terms (s 4). Confirm whether the renunciation form is Form 5-8 in Schedule 2A or whether the proposed form is "substantially similar" and hence falls within the definition of "rights renunciation form" (s 4).

4. Form a documented excluded person policy

• Determine which jurisdictions or persons are "excluded persons" under the instrument by forming a reasoned, documented "reasonable opinion" that offering in that jurisdiction is not lawful or practicable (s 4). Keep contemporaneous records of the legal and practical constraints relied on.

5. Put availability arrangements in place before offers

• Before offers are made, ensure arrangements are in place so that, during the offer period, the disclosure document or PDS is either (a) available for inspection at the registered office, or (b) published on the entity’s website (s 5(3)(a)(i)). Confirm the URL and ensure the web version is accessible and stable during the offer period.

6. Establish a free-supply-on-request procedure

• Implement an operational process to accept and promptly fulfil written or electronic requests for the disclosure document or PDS from any person who is not an excluded person, and to supply the document free of charge (s 5(3)(a)(ii)). Set turnaround time SLAs and allocate responsibility internally.

7. Make the prescribed market announcements

• Announce to each prescribed financial market on which the entity is listed that the availability arrangements have been or will be put in place (s 5(3)(b)). Identify "each prescribed financial market" relevant to the listing and draft the announcement content to state clearly that the disclosure document/PDS is available at the registered office or on the website and will be supplied on request.

8. Use approved forms or document substantial similarity

• Where using an alternative renunciation form rather than Forms 5-8, prepare legal documentation explaining why the alternative form is "substantially similar" to the Schedule 2A forms (s 4). Retain examples and counsel advice where needed.

9. Coordinate settlement and registry operations

• Instruct registries, brokers and settlement agents about the changed mechanics: renunciation forms may be issued without an accompanying physical disclosure document provided the specified arrangements are in place. Train staff and update operational manuals to ensure requests for documents are correctly routed to fulfilment teams.

10. Maintain contemporaneous evidence

• Keep records proving that (a) the disclosure document/PDS was available at the registered office and/or published on the website during the offer period; (b) that market announcements were made to each prescribed financial market; and (c) the basis for any excluded person determinations (s 5(3)(a)-(b), s 4). These records will be crucial if ASIC or another party queries the entitlement to rely on the exemption.

11. Monitor scope of the exemption

• Remember that the exemption applies only "to the extent" that the identified Act sections require inclusion or accompaniment of renunciation forms (s 5(1)-(2)). Take legal advice to map other disclosure obligations under the Corporations Act or market rules that may still require action.

12. Re-assess regulatory and regulatory change risk

• Periodically check the Corporations Regulations for any changes to definitions (Division 3 assets/rights, Schedule 2A) and check whether ASIC has issued subsequent instruments that modify this exemption. The instrument references those external instruments directly (s 4).

13. Prepare for transferees’ requests

• Anticipate that transferees may request a copy of the disclosure document or PDS. Ensure fulfilment points are staffed and that delivery methods (email, post) meet the free-of-charge requirement (s 5(3)(a)(ii)).

14. Evidence announcement timing

• Make market announcements sufficiently in advance of offers and retain proof of distribution to each prescribed financial market. The instrument requires announcement "that the arrangements specified in paragraph (a) have been or will be put in place" (s 5(3)(b)), which implies that the announcement can precede the offer, but it must be made prior to or concurrent with the offer mechanism.

Following these steps will align operational practice with the instrument’s textual requirements. The central compliance theme is preparedness: the exemption is contingent on pre-offer arrangements and public market notification, so practical readiness matters more than ad hoc reliance on the instrument once offers are circulating.